[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100504174507.GI30601@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 18:45:07 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Marcelo Jimenez <mroberto@...i.cetuc.puc-rio.br>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Suspicious compilation warning
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:35:50PM -0300, Marcelo Jimenez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 20:07, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Well, it'll be about this number on everything using sparsemem extreme:
> >
> > #define SECTIONS_PER_ROOT (PAGE_SIZE / sizeof (struct mem_section))
> >
> > and with only 32 sections, this is going to give a NR_SECTION_ROOTS value
> > of zero. I think the calculation of NR_SECTIONS_ROOTS is wrong.
> >
> > #define NR_SECTION_ROOTS (NR_MEM_SECTIONS / SECTIONS_PER_ROOT)
> >
> > Clearly if we have 1 mem section, we want to have one section root, so
> > I think this division should round up any fractional part, thusly:
> >
> > #define NR_SECTION_ROOTS ((NR_MEM_SECTIONS + SECTIONS_PER_ROOT - 1) / SECTIONS_PER_ROOT)
>
> Seems correct to me, Is there any idea when this gets committed?
What should be asked is whether it has been tested - if not, can we find
someone who can test and validate the change?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists